Libellés

mardi 13 octobre 2015

44- Would Greenpeace run for supermarkets?

Nevertheless, there has
been a thing which made me interrupt the writing of my next article, to react
to it under heat.

This thing will have
for main consequence to enrich supermarkets. A pernicious effect? Doubtless, I
can’t imagine that Greenpeace made it deliberately, but it is nevertheless what
is probably going to occur in coming two years. If you don’t believe me, thus
see the new idea launched by Greenpeace France: make a competition of the
supermarket which most approaches the zero residue. Have a look to the
following link, in French:

This is beautiful in
its principle. This is politically correct and it will please consumers.

But what do you think
will happen?

Supermarkets, in order
to win this race that can bring them a lot, will impose on their suppliers,
farmers, even more exacting standards, more and more difficult to meet, and
ever more expensive. Beside this, the risk of rotting in stores or private
homes will significantly increase. Fungicides against rot in conservation are
indeed the main cause of the presence of pesticide residues in fruits and
vegetables.

It will be a reason to
cut prices to farmers, because the rotten products in larger amounts than
before, will be deducted from payments. The farmer, ultimately, will have to
work more, take more risks, and will be paid less.

But it will be also a
good reason to increase consumer prices. This is normal because it is more
difficult to obtain fruits and vegetables without residue. Someone has to pay
the difference, right?

In the end, the
consumer will find fruits and vegetables without residue, no doubt, but more
expensive, more perishable, and all that at the expense of farmers and the
benefit of supermarkets.

You think I exaggerate?

So ask other farmers
who also work with supermarkets, if there is a relationship, however small,
between the price displayed on the shelf and the price received by the farmer.

Ask them how does a
supermarket chain or the purchasing center, when a batch rots, or when there
are complaints, even if the farmer has nothing to do with it, such as for
having waited too long to sell a batch. Simply by a loss deduction on the final
settlement. If the farmer does not send someone on site to verify the problem
and negotiate, an entire truck may be refused as being defective, for only one
problematic box.

For now, the race only
affects apple and potato, but it seems obvious that soon, perhaps before the
end of this first step, the principle will be extended to all fruit and
vegetables.

Second, who will win? I
don't know. What I do know however is that the winner is going to get a
gigantic publicity stunt, and will probably reap huge profits, without effort
or marketing expense. Thus Imagine, Greenpeace will do it. It's unexpected!

The best publicity for
supermarkets, at the expense of Greenpeace. This is of humor, no doubt.

So yes, on this case,
we are entitled to ask what are the real intentions of Greenpeace.